Neil Conway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I don't think this has been adequately thought through at all ... but
>> at least make it ExclusiveLock. What is the use-case for allowing
>> SELECT FOR UPDATE in parallel with this?
> Ok, patch applied -- I adjusted it to use ExclusiveLock, and fleshed out
> some of the comments.
I think last night's discussion makes it crystal-clear why I felt that
this hasn't been sufficiently thought through. Please revert until the
discussion comes to a conclusion.
regards, tom lane
---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 9: the planner will ignore your desire to choose an index scan if your
joining column's datatypes do not match
